LIBRARIAN 2.0 AND AGNOSIA
Stephen Abrams, in his article Web 2.0, Library 2.0, and Librarian 2.0: Preparing for the 2.0 World, saw Librarian 2.0 as striving to “Combine e-resources and print formats and is container and format agnostic”.
To me this means that, when asked for information, we:
- clarify the question
- find out how complex the information should be
- find out how authoritative the information should be, and then
- retrieve/provide it via print, electronic resource, papyrus or podcast - whichever provides the required information best.
Knowledge of the format is not essential - so format/container is ignored as irrelevant unless specified by our client.
SOFTWARE AGNOSIA - GOOD?
In 1996, during a presentation about IT in Western Australian Public Libraries, I suggested that future IT competencies shouldn’t include familiarity with particular software like Dynix or InMagic, but generalist skills like “knowing that help screens exist and how to find them on any software”. It applies today.
Take truncation characters in database searching. There are 3 approaches you could use. They are:
- have a general rule like “try an * and if that doesn’t work know how to find out what does”. (Most useful)
- know how to search the help screens to find out what the character is. (Middling useful)
- memorise the specific characters for each database. (Least useful)
There are so many new sources to search that probably specific knowledge is less useful than generalised rules.
Software agnosia would mean being comfortable with whichever software you need to achieve something - even if it is different from what you used last time, or substantially changed or upgraded. Tool doesn’t matter, results do. If a screen has changed, delve into your skills toolkit, work out how to use it, then get on with it. To get this toolkit, I think you need exposure to lots of software, kind handholding when necesssary and LOTS of playtime.(Technically, a program is labelled “software agnostic” if it doesn’t need to run on a specified platform or hardware.)
USER AGNOSIA - BAD
How can this be reconciled with a user-centered approach? I don’t know. Many librarians, when presented with new software, want a written step-by-step walkthrough and procedures. If that’s what they want, then it’s unfair to say “well - learn some generalist skills and you’ll be able to work it out for yourself”. But providing those step-by-step procedures does not help them to develop a generalist approach. Procedures are useful to ensure standardization and security, but I’m talking basic “how to’s” here.
The crux is competencies. Twenty years ago it was unreasonable to insist that librarians, accountants or doctors do their own wordprocessing. Given that we assess information and present it to our users, I hope that within another 5 years it will be reasonable to ask librarians to do the following (within the network security arrangements for their libraries) - without written step-by-step instructions for specific software:
- Install software from the web
- Sign up to a web based service (eg. Flickr or Bloglines)
- Post to forums and blogs
- Deliver information using pamphlets, IM, SMS, telephone, email, web pages, blogs, personal communication, audio files, video files, screencasts or the Next Big Thing.
Or, am I having user agnosia and this stuff should remain the realm of specialists?
Feed
October 30, 2006 at 16:15
This post and comments were accidentally deleted. Apologies to everyone. Here’s what people wrote:
fran M at 5:31 AM:
i hesitate to say it but that list is errrm…well it isnt that difficult really. anyone who mucks around on the internet could do any of that, and in a lot of job ads i see lately when they talk about “knowledge of the internet” thats what they are talking about. and these arent jobs for librarians. so id suggest that the boat has sailed on that kind of thing as the realm of the specialist.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Kathryn Greenhill at 7:06 AM
Yes, I agree that it’s not too difficult, if you muck around with the internet. Maybe it’s an “aging workforce” issue?
While I don’t think that being older precludes you from mucking around with the internet, I do think that being younger generally includes you.
We would usually demand these skills when appointing a new employee, but what about people already there? Should we demand that they come up to speed with this sort of thing? Is part of the problem that older managers are (quite rightly) too busy managing to play, and so can’t demand of their staff what they don’t do themselves?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
fran M at 7:48 AM
i guess it depends on the job description.And people I know in library jobs tell me by the end of the day they are sick of looking at a computer screen and wouldnt think of playing with it when they get home?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
CarolynM at 8:55 AM
I don’t agree this is an aging workforce issue, but one of attitude. And I think this also links back to your post on early adopters. There have always been those (among librarians as in any profession) who have an attitude that leads them to new ideas and who are open to new ways of doing things, and those who just don’t want to know. And age doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with it. I know plenty of genX people who refuse to engage with the internet, and yet my mother, who is almost 80, is having great fun with it and can see the potential as soon as she sees something new.
I think the time is an issue, and if we set aside ‘play’ time for staff, we would get a better response, but I don’t think that time is the main factor. A good manager will always find time for what is important.
Bringing existing staff “up to speed” is a problem that has been existing for many years, but the “up to speed” with what has changed - we used to argue about whether we expected staff to be able to use Windows and have keyboard skills, and about how to bring existing staff up to speed - now it is such a given that we probably don’t even put it in job descriptions. So the current situation is the same - we’ll do all the same things we have been doing for years, such as in house training and external training and exposure and encouragement etc etc - and some will “get it” and some never will.